Chorage system0.56 2/3 f cm ; 0.17 E f u f 0.(11)f u Uwrap on lateral sides. (12)0-fib-TG5.1-19 (2019) [23] will be the updated version with the European code. The contribution for the nominal shear resistance due to EB-FRP is provided by the following Ionomycin Epigenetics formula: VRFRP = A FRP h FRP . f f wd (cot + cot )sin . S FRP (13)Inside the new prediction model, f f wd represents the productive tensile strength in EB-FRP intercepted by the shear crack and depends upon the strengthening configuration as follows. 1. Full-wrap configuration f f wd = f f wd,c = k R at f FRPu kR =R 0.five 50 2 – R(14) (15)R 50 mm0.5 R 50 mmwhere f f wd,c = FRP tensile strength for full-wrap configuration, at = 0.8, and R = chamfer radius. two. U-wrap configuration with anchorage system f f wd = k a f f wd,c . 3. U-wrap configuration f f wd = min f f bwd , f f wd,c . eight. Comparison of Experimental Results with Prediction Models of Codes and Design Suggestions Table 7 presents a comparison involving experimental EB-FRP contributions to nominal shear resistance Vexp along with the prediction models Vpred with the regarded as style suggestions. Note that the particulars on the specimens, including geometry, strengthening configuration, material properties, and a few benefits, have already been displayed in Tables 3 and six for the experimental research carried out by the authors and those from the literature, respectively. Camostat Cancer figure eight examines the accuracy from the prediction models by comparing the FRP contribution as predicted (Vpred ) using the corresponding experimental worth (Vexp ). The diagonal within the figure designates the 0 tolerance line, indicating an ideal prediction (Vpred = Vexp ). The points above the line are overestimated predictions (Vpred Vexp ), i.e., on the non-conservative (unsafe) side, whereas those within the reduced portion are on the conservative (protected) side (Vpred Vexp ). (17) (16)CivilEng 2021,Table 7. Comparison of experimental outcomes versus prediction models of codes and recommendations.Specimens Vexp S6-19 Vpred /Vexp S806-12 Vpred /Vexp AC-I440 Vpred /Vexp JSCE 2001 Vpred /Vexp fib 2001 Vpred /Vexp fib 2019 Vpred /VexpDeniaud (2001) [12] T4S4-G90 T6S4-G90 49 110 43.7 107.6 0.9 1.0 56.1 194.5 1.1 1.eight 39.four 96.9 0.eight 0.9 163.6 319.0 3.3 2.9 53.8 100.9 1.1 0.9 47.1 133.two 1.0 1.Qu et al. (2005) [16] U4 U5 U6 22 50 196 20.8 82.six 187.0 0.9 1.7 1.0 31.4 125.0 240.9 1.four 2.5 1.2 18.7 74.4 169.0 0.9 1.five 0.9 54.6 217.1 491.four 2.5 4.three 2.5 20.3 80.five 182.0 0.9 1.6 0.9 17.1 58.6 108.1 0.8 1.two 0.Leung et al. (2007) [14] SB-U1 MB-U1 LB-U2 SB-F1 MB-F1 LB-F1 24 5 22 25 87 334 7.9 32.three 105.six 10.7 42.0 181.9 0.three 6.five 4.eight 0.4 0.5 0.5 ten.1 41.5 135.six 20.6 80.9 350.three 0.four eight.3 6.2 0.eight 0.9 1.0 7.1 29.1 95.1 9.six 37.8 163.8 0.3 five.eight 4.three 0.4 0.four 0.five 26.1 102.6 444.two 26.1 102.six 444.two 1.1 20.five 20.2 1.0 1.2 1.3 9.eight 38.6 167.0 17.7 69.8 302.1 0.4 7.7 7.six 0.7 0.eight 0.9 7.5 23.three 55.5 14.9 59.6 238.four 0.3 4.7 two.5 0.6 0.7 0.Bae et al. (2012) [10] S-Str M-Str L-Str 47 87 127 25.six 68.five 121.4 0.five 0.8 1.0 32.9 93.6 171.eight 0.7 1.1 1.4 23.1 61.7 109.3 0.five 0.7 0.9 80.2 180.four 319.5 1.7 2.1 two.5 38.four 94.6 167.eight 0.eight 1.1 1.3 33.three 80.4 136.7 0.7 0.9 1.Nguyen-Minh and Rovn (2015) [15] G1-GFRP-1B G1-GFRP-2A G1-GFRP-3A G2-GFRP-1A G2-GFRP-2A G2-GFRP-3A 18 55 64 18 80 180 33.9 123 232.four 38.five 153.1 294.0 1.9 2.2 three.6 two.1 1.9 1.6 43.five 157.9 298.4 49.four 196.6 377.six 2.4 2.9 4.7 two.7 two.five two.1 30.five 110.7 209.2 34.7 137.9 264.eight 1.7 two.0 3.3 1.9 1.7 1.5 91.0 364 819.0 101.9 459.7 1063.9 five.1 six.six 12.eight 5.7 five.7 5.9 23.0 91.9 206.7 25.1 113.4 262.four 1.three 1.7 3.two 1.four 1.4 1.5 48.two 1.